7 ms·

I agree with everything you say, but I'm in the camp that thinks that front-end is stabilizing. I feel many web projects can go a long way with something like

I agree with everything you say, but I'm in the camp that thinks that front-end is stabilizing. I feel many web projects can go a long way with something like NextJS, a few classic libs (eg, lodash/underscore/ramda), maybe a few libraries for handling data if you really need them. The design frameworks (MaterialUI, Tailwind, etc.) are also fairly stable. Perhaps that's one dependency too many for some?

sph 4y ago
I've heard that the frontend is stabilising since jQuery came out. Now it's the React devs saying it, but this time for real.
- arcturus17 4y ago
  Nearly 10 years after the release of the library, React is by far the most commonly used framework according to the 2021 SO dev survey. It is also the number 4 most loved. [1] I'm a React dev as much as I am a Python or C# dev. I reach for tools that I know I can build in and hire for. It's been years since I use React with a single command line to kickstart a CRA or Next app, and take it from there. Yes, there are pitfalls once you start building anything non-trivial, but so does Django which has been around since 2005 and by virtue of being back-end should be more stable.
CharlieDigital 4y ago
Next.js is really bad, IMO and perpetuates more bad practices. Both Target.com and Walmart.com are Next.js apps. Both utilize SSR to render the pages (view the markup in the network tab). Both then STILL send the full data model to the UI (check the `__NEXT_DATA__` on Walmart.com and `__TGT_DATA__` on Target.com) because Next.js doesn't quite offer the right amount of control over what to send back (compare this to Astro.js, which does offer control over which data is needed for the client-side binding). Next.js handling of images is ugly. It creates tag soup for responsive images instead of using native HTML and CSS capabilities (again, compare it to Astro.js and it's night and day). Their stunt and exaggerated numbers with Turbopack further contributes to fracturing the front-end community and introduces Yet Another Tool instead of plugging into Vite.
- epolanski 4y ago
  Also, its implementation details include monsters like monkey patching native fetch which lost me insane amounts of money and time to be found (file uploads with more than 15 kb of data broke everything). next is nothing more than yet another bloated collage of poor ideas with poor execution, but they have marketing going for them.
- siquick 4y ago
  If those are the only complaints you have about Next then they’re doing great.
  - CharlieDigital 4y ago
    Those are on top of why React is not the way.
- Existenceblinks 4y ago
  Next.js also get into many of my govt's websites. It's the worst in any direction. I can explain why with bullets but so tired of these repetitive well-known reasons already.
- Aeolun 4y ago
  Next.js is really easy for developers of all levels to work with though. It’s main benefit is the ease of use, not the optimized client side data transfer. What I see from Astro.js is a lot of magic. This is great if it works, but chances are it won’t for a lot of people.
  - cies 4y ago
    Did you try Qt and QML for creating a GUI? It's soo much easier on the brain its not even funny.
    - Aeolun 4y ago
      A long time ago. It was so painful I resolved to never do the same thing again. Presumably things have changed in the meantime, but I just don’t see the point any more. Web has won and my experience is there already anyway.
sally_glance 4y ago
Your choice of examples got me interested - because mine would be similar. Would you recommend something else? Besides Material UI I wouldn't recommend any React-based UI framework (Tailwind is only CSS, solid pick with React nonetheless). I would not recommend NextJS without context, but it is to my knowledge the most mature full-stack React-based framework.
bufordtwain 4y ago
I find it funny that the library that you think is helping to stabilize the front-end is called "NextJS".
- arcturus17 4y ago
  It's becoming a standard, and yes, I personally like it. There's plenty of other great choices if you don't like it. And even some of the up and coming libs, like SolidJS, feel stable compared to the 2010's - they add incremental improvements but keep things that some people really like, like JSX. In the early to mid 2010's everyone was reinventing the wheel constantly.
  - deepsun 4y ago
    Everyone says their favorite library "is becoming standard". The rest depends on marketing budgets.
    - arcturus17 4y ago
      Do you have any real commentary against Next.js not being standard, or only generic snide and feelings of superiority directed at "everyone" but yourself? I'll share a few facts about Next.js: - Their showcase: https://nextjs.org/showcase#all https://nextjs.org/showcase#all. The number of super-scale websites using it speaks for itself (doesn't include among others Walmart, which another commenter pointed as an example of how terrible Next.js, but which I've found to be surprisingly good) - Explosive growth in the 2021 State-of-JS from 2017-2021, with 91% purported retention - The core tech, React, is voted by far the most commonly used front-end framework in SO dev survey 2021, and 4th most loved. You would never guess by reading HN. Many if not most people building an SSG or SSR site in React are going to reach for it. If this does not point to a standard then I guess what's only left is to run in circles and argue what a standard is.
      - sph 4y ago
        Don't take this the wrong way, but all those impressive figures you've shown don't compare to actual experience. Some of us detractors have 15+ years doing stuff on the Web and we've seen this cycle play out 2 or 3 times. Everything is cool and the best way of animating divs, until it isn't. I do not like playing the experience card, but when someone tells me React is good and simple, it just tells me they have no idea whatsoever what good and simple has ever been. And if Next.js is supposed to be a standard, then I might as well quit doing framework at all because it is not a very good library, it just has great marketing, and thrives upon the shoulders of the most common frontend library, React. Sorry to the devs which are often here to PR, but that's how it is. It gets you easily to 80% of the way, the last 20% are really where the issues (bad docs, bugs, constant churn) lie.
esskay 4y ago
it'll be stable when the JS community stops reinventing the wheel several times a year. Every year we have the 'next big thing' and a whole new JS framework and ecosystem thats set to be the one to beat them all. Fast forward 2 years, its mostly abandoned and upgrading a 12 month old project is a nightmare. That is not stable. I can pick up a PHP, Python, <insert other language here> script written 2-3 years ago and know it'll work if I try to do something with it. With JS you can guarantee that one of the bajilion dependancies has had a backward breaking change or vanished off the face of the earth and the whole thing falls apart. JS tooling, and always has been a total disaster, and NextJS hasn't fixed that.
- arcturus17 4y ago
  I've been coding my front-ends in React for 5 or 6 years. I don't have any of the problems you describe, I can also pick up old projects and run them without much problem. There was the change from classes to hooks but I still remember classes fairly well. Then there's been NextJS which I've picked up in like a weekend. That's it. There are new frameworks popping up all the time. Some look very interesting. But React has been around since 2013 and it's a world standard. I agree that JS/TS tooling is largely a mess, it's why I don't like JS/TS back-ends other than maybe some simple NextJS API routes, or an Express server with something like three files. But on the front-end, React CRA and NextJS (with TypeScript) both have served most of my needs with just a few CLI commands and minimal config. I rarely have the need to meddle with the tooling and I can get up and running in seconds.
  - jiggawatts 4y ago
    "I haven't died playing russian roulette, you should try it too." The general experience across the industry in a statistical sense is that JavaScript frameworks are a tyre fire best avoided. I'm yet to see a JS app that doesn't need constant maintenance to remain compilable. Meanwhile, the ASP.NET ecosystem had like one significant breaking change since like... 2002.
    - JackMorgan 4y ago

sph 4y ago

I've heard that the frontend is stabilising since jQuery came out. Now it's the React devs saying it, but this time for real.

arcturus17 4y ago
Nearly 10 years after the release of the library, React is by far the most commonly used framework according to the 2021 SO dev survey. It is also the number 4 most loved. [1] I'm a React dev as much as I am a Python or C# dev. I reach for tools that I know I can build in and hire for. It's been years since I use React with a single command line to kickstart a CRA or Next app, and take it from there. Yes, there are pitfalls once you start building anything non-trivial, but so does Django which has been around since 2005 and by virtue of being back-end should be more stable.

CharlieDigital 4y ago

Next.js is really bad, IMO and perpetuates more bad practices. Both Target.com and Walmart.com are Next.js apps. Both utilize SSR to render the pages (view the markup in the network tab). Both then STILL send the full data model to the UI (check the `__NEXT_DATA__` on Walmart.com and `__TGT_DATA__` on Target.com) because Next.js doesn't quite offer the right amount of control over what to send back (compare this to Astro.js, which does offer control over which data is needed for the client-side binding). Next.js handling of images is ugly. It creates tag soup for responsive images instead of using native HTML and CSS capabilities (again, compare it to Astro.js and it's night and day). Their stunt and exaggerated numbers with Turbopack further contributes to fracturing the front-end community and introduces Yet Another Tool instead of plugging into Vite.

epolanski 4y ago
Also, its implementation details include monsters like monkey patching native fetch which lost me insane amounts of money and time to be found (file uploads with more than 15 kb of data broke everything). next is nothing more than yet another bloated collage of poor ideas with poor execution, but they have marketing going for them.
siquick 4y ago
If those are the only complaints you have about Next then they’re doing great.
- CharlieDigital 4y ago
  Those are on top of why React is not the way.
Existenceblinks 4y ago
Next.js also get into many of my govt's websites. It's the worst in any direction. I can explain why with bullets but so tired of these repetitive well-known reasons already.
Aeolun 4y ago
Next.js is really easy for developers of all levels to work with though. It’s main benefit is the ease of use, not the optimized client side data transfer. What I see from Astro.js is a lot of magic. This is great if it works, but chances are it won’t for a lot of people.
- cies 4y ago
  Did you try Qt and QML for creating a GUI? It's soo much easier on the brain its not even funny.
  - Aeolun 4y ago
    A long time ago. It was so painful I resolved to never do the same thing again. Presumably things have changed in the meantime, but I just don’t see the point any more. Web has won and my experience is there already anyway.

sally_glance 4y ago

Your choice of examples got me interested - because mine would be similar. Would you recommend something else? Besides Material UI I wouldn't recommend any React-based UI framework (Tailwind is only CSS, solid pick with React nonetheless). I would not recommend NextJS without context, but it is to my knowledge the most mature full-stack React-based framework.

bufordtwain 4y ago

I find it funny that the library that you think is helping to stabilize the front-end is called "NextJS".

arcturus17 4y ago
It's becoming a standard, and yes, I personally like it. There's plenty of other great choices if you don't like it. And even some of the up and coming libs, like SolidJS, feel stable compared to the 2010's - they add incremental improvements but keep things that some people really like, like JSX. In the early to mid 2010's everyone was reinventing the wheel constantly.
- deepsun 4y ago
  Everyone says their favorite library "is becoming standard". The rest depends on marketing budgets.
  - arcturus17 4y ago
    Do you have any real commentary against Next.js not being standard, or only generic snide and feelings of superiority directed at "everyone" but yourself? I'll share a few facts about Next.js: - Their showcase: https://nextjs.org/showcase#all https://nextjs.org/showcase#all. The number of super-scale websites using it speaks for itself (doesn't include among others Walmart, which another commenter pointed as an example of how terrible Next.js, but which I've found to be surprisingly good) - Explosive growth in the 2021 State-of-JS from 2017-2021, with 91% purported retention - The core tech, React, is voted by far the most commonly used front-end framework in SO dev survey 2021, and 4th most loved. You would never guess by reading HN. Many if not most people building an SSG or SSR site in React are going to reach for it. If this does not point to a standard then I guess what's only left is to run in circles and argue what a standard is.
    - sph 4y ago
      Don't take this the wrong way, but all those impressive figures you've shown don't compare to actual experience. Some of us detractors have 15+ years doing stuff on the Web and we've seen this cycle play out 2 or 3 times. Everything is cool and the best way of animating divs, until it isn't. I do not like playing the experience card, but when someone tells me React is good and simple, it just tells me they have no idea whatsoever what good and simple has ever been. And if Next.js is supposed to be a standard, then I might as well quit doing framework at all because it is not a very good library, it just has great marketing, and thrives upon the shoulders of the most common frontend library, React. Sorry to the devs which are often here to PR, but that's how it is. It gets you easily to 80% of the way, the last 20% are really where the issues (bad docs, bugs, constant churn) lie.

esskay 4y ago

it'll be stable when the JS community stops reinventing the wheel several times a year. Every year we have the 'next big thing' and a whole new JS framework and ecosystem thats set to be the one to beat them all. Fast forward 2 years, its mostly abandoned and upgrading a 12 month old project is a nightmare. That is not stable. I can pick up a PHP, Python, <insert other language here> script written 2-3 years ago and know it'll work if I try to do something with it. With JS you can guarantee that one of the bajilion dependancies has had a backward breaking change or vanished off the face of the earth and the whole thing falls apart. JS tooling, and always has been a total disaster, and NextJS hasn't fixed that.

arcturus17 4y ago
I've been coding my front-ends in React for 5 or 6 years. I don't have any of the problems you describe, I can also pick up old projects and run them without much problem. There was the change from classes to hooks but I still remember classes fairly well. Then there's been NextJS which I've picked up in like a weekend. That's it. There are new frameworks popping up all the time. Some look very interesting. But React has been around since 2013 and it's a world standard. I agree that JS/TS tooling is largely a mess, it's why I don't like JS/TS back-ends other than maybe some simple NextJS API routes, or an Express server with something like three files. But on the front-end, React CRA and NextJS (with TypeScript) both have served most of my needs with just a few CLI commands and minimal config. I rarely have the need to meddle with the tooling and I can get up and running in seconds.
- jiggawatts 4y ago
  "I haven't died playing russian roulette, you should try it too." The general experience across the industry in a statistical sense is that JavaScript frameworks are a tyre fire best avoided. I'm yet to see a JS app that doesn't need constant maintenance to remain compilable. Meanwhile, the ASP.NET ecosystem had like one significant breaking change since like... 2002.
  - JackMorgan 4y ago